Note: Yes, you read that right. The headline is not mine, but from the original masters of newspaper propaganda, Pravda. See the URL. Gotta love the classic photo they chose. But then, look at some of the other news stories they have. See the end of the article for some other views that have been published here based on factual data. – Anthony
 |
04.07.2008 Source: Pravda.Ru
At least 2.5 million people have been killed in natural disasters over the recent 48 years. The number of casualties over the recent 20 years made up 1.6 million people, the UN said.
Rob Vos, the director of the Development Policy and Analysis Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), said that the number of natural disasters taking place in the world nowadays has quadrupled in comparison with the 1970s. The disaster-related economic damage has increased at least seven times.
The authors of the report delivered at the UN headquarters in New York at the session of the UN Economic and Social Council did not specify the reason why natural disasters started happening more frequently in the world today. They said, however, that the frequency of catastrophes could be linked with the global climate change. It was also said that the death toll in developing states exceeds the number of casualties in developed states 20-30 times.
“The consequences of disasters become more and more destructive, whereas the countries are unable to overcome them effectively without the assistance from the international community. We believe it is necessary to set up a foundation to help the victims of natural disasters with the budget of 4 or 5 billion dollars,” Vos said.
The official added that all existent humanitarian projects including those conducted under the UN aegis are mostly aimed at overcoming consequences rather than preventing them.
Source: agencies
NOTE: Some other views on the “frequency of natural disasters linked to climate change” are below, follow the links.
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/hurricanes-to-global-warming-link-blown-away/
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/06/22/midwest-floods-and-unjustified-climate-change-fears/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This piece, and most of the responses to it, provides us with a good example of a standard debating trick: misdirection. The idea is to attack an easy target, not the real thing. Go ahead, make a big deal about a stupid article in Pravda. Meanwhile, you’re NOT addressing the real arguments posed by actual scientists in such places as the IPCC reports and the NAS reports. How convenient.
In March last year, Lloyds of London, who know more about natural disasters than anyone else – since they end up paying for most of them, said:
“The absence of major natural disasters last year (2006) helped insurance market Lloyd’s of London return to profitability after its loss in 2005.
The market recorded a profit of £3.6bn in 2006, compared with a £103m loss it made the year before when it had to pay out damages on hurricane Katrina.
Lloyd’s said the “exceptionally low level of catastrophes” had helped it.”
In March this year they said about 2007:
“Lloyd’s of London warned yesterday that an absence last year of natural disasters or man-made accidents was putting pressure on firms to reduce premiums in 2008.
The world’s oldest and biggest insurance market said that though the lack of major disasters had allowed firms to push up profits 5% in 2007, underwriting margins were being squeezed.”
We are actually going through a quiet period for natural disasters since Katrina, not the other way round.
Ophiuchus,
While articles like this are published, blaming global warming as a consequence, I see no reason why sites like this shouldn’t highlight their flaws. Perhaps you should direct your anger at the publishers of these articles for sensationalising and diluting your cause, instead of blaming us for highlighting their fallacy.
I see nothing wrong with their stories. Here in the U.S. we have them all the time. I mean, we have our supermarket tabloids, so why can’t Pravda be the Russian equivalent? And don’t get me started on Mr. Gore’s docudrama {or is that docucomedy?}
Good point, Traktion. Yes, it’s fair to point out stupid news stories. But that’s about all this subject deserves: point it out and move on. Hand-wringing about how the MSM is involved in a conspiracy against you is a waste of time. EVERYBODY thinks the MSM is out to get ’em. The pro-AGW people get furious when some MSM gives equal time to an anti-AGW PR person who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. And while there are some good anti-AGW points, there are a lot of nitwits in the anti-AGW movement.
REPLY: It is not an excusive club; plenty of nitwits in the pro AGW movement too. – Anthony
Maybe we should blame the Asian Tsunami on AGW…
Here in the UK, the press & government are still ranting on about the flooding we had here last year. They, of course, are blaming climate change. I blame the fact that there are more houses built on floodplanes (against the advise of the environment agancy) but, I guess when there is a popular theory to rake in the taxes…
It seems to me that there is a more logical reason for these deaths. The stupid places that man decides to reside.
Ophiuchus writes:
“Meanwhile, you’re NOT addressing the real arguments posed by actual scientists in such places as the IPCC reports and the NAS reports. How convenient.”
Who knew there were real arguments? After all, the science is settled.
The real scientists are known to the IPCC and the NAS. Since they haven’t sent me a membership card my review of whatever they say means nothing.
In fact I doubt I could address a person at the IPCC or the NAS. Security guards would be called and hilarity (aka: a severe beating) would follow.
And why would those worthies ask me for money or agreement? The government will provide the money by taxing it from others and giving it to them.
BTW: The responses are not a good example of misdirection. Most address the article just as the rules of debate say they should.
A few comments do wander through DDT politics and whether the NYT or Pravda deserves the Best Liars In Printed Media award.
The true example and attempt at misdirection comes from you. i. e. we should address other matters and not the topic article.
Scepticism on the extent of AGW has another major advantage – apart from being rational and more in tune with the facts – that has only just occured to me…….We can have a sense of humour about the whole thing without feeling like we have to self-flaggelate for a month in penance!
Hopefully the data sets will continue to erode the case for disastrous AGW to the point where we can all avoid the real potential disaster that’s looming – that of self-induced economic decline…..because if that eventuates the smile will be wiped from all our faces.
Christopher, how true!
THE Indur Goklany?
It’s an honor! On behalf of us all, I welcome you.
Totals from fig. 1 of your citation:
INCLUDING
Droughts, Floods, Windstorms, Slides, Waves/Surges, Extreme Temperatures,
Wild Fires
TOTALS:
Deaths per year
1900–1989: 216,839
1990–2006: 28,266
Death Rates per year (per million people)
1900–1989: 94.16
1990–2006: 4.87
REPLY: Evan I’m confused, where do you see him in comments with a citation? -Anthony
Per Pravda:At least 2.5 million people have been killed in natural disasters over the recent 48 years. The number of casualties over the recent 20 years made up 1.6 million people, the UN said.
Everyone should check out Indur M. Goklany’s article, linked in his post above, to put this particular propagandistic factiod into its proper perspective. [Those particular numbers did indeed sound rather small to me, even at first blush.]
It’s rather strange that nearly everything the AGW acolytes claim as true turns out to be either irrelevant, unsubstantiated, or flat-out wrong. It’s getting to be quite impressive!
Anthony,
Indur Goklany posted above and left a link to his paper:
http://www.csccc.info/reports/report_23.pdf
Evan extracted from it!!
REPLY: I found it, there was a misspelling that led to some confusion in searching.
Hmmmm.
I noticed that they didn’t include the number of people who died of malaria because the UN banned DDT.
[…] During our discussion of the preposterous news story from Pravda, claiming this headline: “Earth begins to kill people for changing its climate” a scientist dropped in to provide us some insight into his latest paper. It was highly […]
To Christopher: Skeptics always have more fun! True Believers know that Laughter has been forbidden by the Prophet, because of course we are all about to be Punished for our Sins and we must Repent! Repent! Repent! from our wicked ways or we will all Perish in Flame!
I mean how could anyone be joyful when Perishment in Flames is waiting just around the corner, and they know it’s their duty to evangelize the wicked, unbelieving world? Laughter is just one more sympton of what wicked, wicked, godless, gaialess people these skeptics are.
Of course, the faithful are doing comedy routines all the time, they just don’t know it. “Why are you talking about some Pravda article?” = “Pay No Attention to that Man behind the Curtain! I am the Great and Powerful OZ!!!”
And then there’s the mental picture of Hansen as Sgt. Schultz when his early data was used to support global cooling: “I know Nut-ink! I know Nut-ink!!!”
I tell you, there’s a gold mine of material out there!
[…] Earth begins to kill people for changing its climate. Yes, that is a real headline. Watts Up With That? has the […]
Reid: In 1851, NYT would probably have been owned by Abolitionists, who, if they weren’t Republicans then, would be in a few years. Unless you can show me I’m wrong.
Andrew: My comment about the NY Times was an allusion to their Democratic party bias and AGW bias. Pravda was to the Communist party what the NY Times is to the Democratic party. Science at both Pravda and the NY Times is reported with political bias.
Ophiuchus,
The story isn’t as important as the fact that the UN is taking an obviously contrived “scientific” report and using it for political and financial reasons. This is an example of what you referred to on 07/05 as “this ridiculous tale” of the “common fallacy that scientists are willfully distorting the science of AGW.”
You can argue that it is the UN who is distorting the science who created this report. Anything that purports to connect climate change to natural disasters is at least playing scientist.
In 1851, NYT would probably have been owned by Abolitionists, who, if they weren’t Republicans then, would be in a few years.
Raymond was a Whig, actually (the Republican Party wasn’t around then), but, yes, from the radical antislavery end of that party, and, yes, he was in on the founding of the GOP (1854).
You’re right about the other articles on that page.
eg. This story hints that the US created an earthquake in Iraq that led to the Asian Tsunami with its subtitle US forces supposedly used a secret weapon in Iraq, which resulted in a powerful earthquake, but we learn in the final paragraph that the earthquake was natural.
On that link we are asked to go to the Pravda.ru forum. The place where truth hurts. I wonder if they understand that translation.
Excuse to break up the ice here at the contentful discussion over scientific fuss-over arguments you’re having, but me thinks Earth Begins to Kill People for Changing It’s Climate is rather narrowly scoped. See, the humans isn’t the only dwellers of this planet, speaking of animalia kingdom. And earth obviously doesn’t kill people or any other species without no particular reasons.
Remember this fello homo, 6 billions years of age isn’t a short life span. And yes, planet earth has to defend herself from the cruelty of humans’ civilizations inasmuch as from the universe’s ecosystem.
[…] follow the rss link provided at the sidebar called Watt’s Up with Thy World. Notwithstanding, this particular post tickled me a lil’ to say the least and urged me to blurb at it just a […]
I’d rather take my chances with nature. In the 20th century, governments murdered upwards of 200 million of their OWN citizens.
Hah! I told you Global Warming was a joke.
These numbers don’t even begin to compare with the number of people I’ve killed playing Medal of Honor. And it definitely can’t touch my kill total from Golden Eye. And these have all come in under 10 years.
I mean as far as comparisons between totally fictitious goes, this article should be about ME. In the world of fiction and fantasy, I am a much much bigger threat to your existence than Global Warming.
In the real world, the envirowackos should go after the person that wasted paper writing this story…